Download Free Strategies To Leverage Research Funding Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Strategies To Leverage Research Funding and write the review.

Since 1992 the Department of Defense (DOD), through the U.S. Army Medical Research and Material Command, has received congressionally earmarked appropriations for programs of biomedical research on prostate, breast, and ovarian cancer; neurofibromatosis; tuberous sclerosis; and other health problems. Appropriations for these Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs are used to support peer reviewed extramural research project, training, and infrastructure grants. Congress has become concerned about funding increases for these programs given current demands on the military budget. At the request of Congress, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) examined possibilities of augmenting program funding from alternative sources. The resulting IOM book, Strategies to Leverage Research Funding: Guiding DOD's Peer Reviewed Medical Research Programs, focuses on nonfederal and private sector contributions that could extend the appropriated funds without biasing the peer review project selection process.
Biomedical scientists' concern about the future of funding of health science research prompted this volume's exploration of the financing of the entire health research enterprise and the complex reasons underlying these increasing concerns. The committee presents clear-cut recommendations for improving allocation policies to ensure a balanced distribution of resources that will allow the biomedical research community to build on exciting recent discoveries in many areas. Funding Health Sciences Research also provides the first-ever comprehensive reports on the 1980s policies that have affected the research landscape, including stabilization, downward negotiation, and extended grant duration.
Bridging the gap between higher education research and policy making was always a challenge, but the recent calls for more evidence-based policies have opened a window of unprecedented opportunity for researchers to bring more contributions to shaping the future of the European Higher Education Area (EHEA). Encouraged by the success of the 2011 first edition, Romania and Armenia have organised a 2nd edition of the Future of Higher Education – Bologna Process Researchers’ Conference (FOHE-BPRC) in November 2014, with the support of the Italian Presidency of the European Union and as part of the official EHEA agenda. Reuniting over 170 researchers from more than 30 countries, the event was a forum to debate the trends and challenges faced by higher education today and look at the future of European cooperation in higher education. The research volumes offer unique insights regarding the state of affairs of European higher education and research, as well as forward-looking policy proposals. More than 50 articles focus on essential themes in higher education: Internationalization of higher education; Financing and governance; Excellence and the diversification of missions; Teaching, learning and student engagement; Equity and the social dimension of higher education; Education, research and innovation; Quality assurance, The impacts of the Bologna Process on the EHEA and beyond and Evidence-based policies in higher education. "The Bologna process was launched at a time of great optimism about the future of the European project – to which, of course, the reform of higher education across the continent has made a major contribution. Today, for the present, that optimism has faded as economic troubles have accumulated in the Euro-zone, political tensions have been increased on issues such as immigration and armed conflict has broken out in Ukraine. There is clearly a risk that, against this troubled background, the Bologna process itself may falter. There are already signs that it has been downgraded in some countries with evidence of political withdrawal. All the more reason for the voice of higher education researchers to be heard. Since the first conference they have established themselves as powerful stakeholders in the development of the EHEA, who are helping to maintain the momentum of the Bologna process. Their pivotal role has been strengthened by the second Bucharest conference." Peter Scott, Institute of Education, London (General Rapporteur of the FOHE-BPRC first edition)
This Review sets out to propose a structure for the funding arrangements for the whole spectrum of health research, with the objective of obtaining the maximum benefit from research success and, where possible, eliminating duplication of effort. The Review found, however, that the UK is at risk of failing to reap the full economic, health and social benefits that the UK's public investment in health research should generate. There is no overarching UK health research strategy to ensure UK health priorities are considered through all types of research and there are two key gaps in the translation of health research: (i) translating ideas from basic and clinical research into the development of new products and approaches to treatment of disease and illness; (ii) implementing those new products and approaches into clinical practice.The Review also found that the wider funding arrangements for supporting translation of ideas from conception to practice could be more coherent or comprehensive and, where arrangements exist, they do not function well. The Review identified cultural, institutional and financial barriers to translating research into practice in the publicly funded research arena. But it also found that, in the private sector, the pharmaceuticals industry is facing increasing challenges in translating research into health and economic benefit. The Review has sought to make recommendations that will increase the translation of R&D into health and economic benefit for the UK, both in the public and private sectors. The Review recommends that the Government should seek to achieve better coordination of health research and more coherent funding arrangements to support translation by establishing an Office for Strategic Coordination of Health Research (OSCHR).
To explore the role of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in innovative drug development and its impact on patient access, the Board on Health Care Services and the Board on Health Sciences Policy of the National Academies jointly hosted a public workshop on July 24â€"25, 2019, in Washington, DC. Workshop speakers and participants discussed the ways in which federal investments in biomedical research are translated into innovative therapies and considered approaches to ensure that the public has affordable access to the resulting new drugs. This publication summarizes the presentations and discussions from the workshop.
Translational Orthopedics: Designing and Conducting Translational Research covers the principles of evidence-based medicine and applies these principles to the design of translational investigations. The reader will come to fully understand important concepts including case-control study, prospective cohort study, randomized trial, and reliability study. Medical researchers will benefit from greater confidence in their ability to initiate and execute their own investigations, avoid common pitfalls in translational orthopedics, and know what is needed in collaboration. Further, this title is an indispensable tool in grant writing and funding efforts. The practical, straightforward approach helps the aspiring investigator navigate challenging considerations in study design and implementation. The book provides valuable discussions of the critical appraisal of published studies in translational orthopedics, allowing the reader to learn how to evaluate the quality of such studies with respect to measuring outcomes and to make effective use of all types of evidence in patient care. In short, this practical guidebook will be of interest to every Medical Researcher or Orthopedist who has ever had a good clinical idea but not the knowledge of how to test it. Focuses on the principles of evidence-based medicine and applies these principles to the design of translational investigations within orthopedics Provides a practical, straightforward approach that helps investigators navigate challenging considerations in study design and implementation Details discussions of the critical appraisal of published studies in translational orthopedics, supporting evaluation with respect to measuring outcomes and making effective use of all types of evidence in patient care
This report examines the operations of the APT, reviews its extensive assessment program, and provides NRC Committee findings concerning the ATP's operations and recommendations for potential improvements to the program. The report includes a summary of a major conference held in April 2000 as well as seven papers, including surveys of the industry participants or users of the ATP program, a summary of the results of fifty awards, detailed assessments of major joint ventures, and a description of the current selection process. It is the most comprehensive study to date of the program's origins, operations, achievements, and assessment. Its conclusion: the program works.
The past 50 years have witnessed a revolution in computing and related communications technologies. The contributions of industry and university researchers to this revolution are manifest; less widely recognized is the major role the federal government played in launching the computing revolution and sustaining its momentum. Funding a Revolution examines the history of computing since World War II to elucidate the federal government's role in funding computing research, supporting the education of computer scientists and engineers, and equipping university research labs. It reviews the economic rationale for government support of research, characterizes federal support for computing research, and summarizes key historical advances in which government-sponsored research played an important role. Funding a Revolution contains a series of case studies in relational databases, the Internet, theoretical computer science, artificial intelligence, and virtual reality that demonstrate the complex interactions among government, universities, and industry that have driven the field. It offers a series of lessons that identify factors contributing to the success of the nation's computing enterprise and the government's role within it.
The medical research landscape in the United States is supported by a variety of organizations that spend billions of dollars in government and private funds each year to seek answers to complex medical and public health problems. The largest government funder is the National Institutes of Health (NIH), followed by the Department of Defense (DoD). Almost half of DoD's medical research funding is administered by the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs (CDMRP). The mission of CDMRP is to foster innovative approaches to medical research in response to the needs of its stakeholdersâ€"the U.S. military, their families, the American public, and Congress. CDMRP funds medical research to be performed by other government and nongovernmental organizations, but it does not conduct research itself. The major focus of CDMRP funded research is the improved prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of diseases, injuries, or conditions that affect service members and their families, and the general public. The hallmarks of CDMRP include reviewing applications for research funding using a two-tiered review process, and involving consumers throughout the process. Evaluation of the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs Review Process evaluates the CDMRP two-tiered peer review process, its coordination of research priorities with NIH and the Department of Veterans Affairs, and provides recommendations on how the process for reviewing and selecting studies can be improved.